A Michigan judge on Friday rejected a GOP effort to block the state's largest county from certifying its election results, ruling that the lawsuit's claims of widespread voter fraud were "incorrect and not credible."
Judge Timothy Kenny of Michigan's Third Circuit Court in Wayne County, which covers the Detroit area, rejected a request by Republican poll challengers for an injunction against finalizing the election results in a battleground state where President-elect Joe Biden has been projected to defeat President Trump.
Kenny said in a 13-page decision that he found witness testimony in support of the lawsuit unbelievable, and that stopping the vote count would harm the public interest.
"This Court finds that there are legal remedies for Plaintiffs to pursue and there is no harm to Plaintiffs if the injunction is not granted," Kenny wrote. "There would be harm, however, to the Defendants if the injunction is granted."
"Waiting for the Court to locate and appoint an independent, nonpartisan auditor to examine the votes, reach a conclusion and then finally report to the Court would involve untold delay," he continued. "It would cause delay in establishing the Presidential vote tabulation, as well as all other County and State races. It would also undermine faith in the Electoral System."
The lawsuit was brought by two Republican poll challengers in Wayne County who made sweeping allegations of fraud by poll workers. They alleged, among other things, that unregistered voters were allowed to cast ballots, late absentee ballots had been backdated and that ballots had been processed with false information.
Kenny said in his decision that witness testimony supporting the lawsuit had been severely undermined by that of elections officials overseeing the counting process.
"Plaintiffs’ affiants did not have a full understanding of the TCF absent ballot tabulation process," Kenny wrote, referring to the Detroit convention center where vote counting took place. "No formal challenges were filed. However, sinister, fraudulent motives were ascribed to the process and the City of Detroit. Plaintiffs’ interpretation of events is incorrect and not credible."
David Kallman, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs, did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment.